I am rather surprised by the approach here.
There are several RDF-related projects - Jena, Marmotta, Any23, Stanbol,
Clerezza and other that use RDF.
How do they fit in?
reto wrote:
Following the recent announcement and as mentioned yesterday I've started
some steps towards commons RDF.
How do those projects fit in?
On the Clerezza list there has been support for working with
/commons-rdf/commons-rdf [1] No other project has been contacted.
There is a community, with a significant number of participants and
significant discussion, sometimes quite intense, at
https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues
from both ASF committers and people outside ASF. The work was
communicated to all Apache RDF-related projects from the start.
The hope, at least my hope, has always been to bring this to Apache IF
it got some traction with users. This is stated in [2]
There is SANDBOX-479 still open. This is a blocker to bringing code in.
Benedikt wrote:
*copy pasting my answer from the other thread*
We had a similar proposal a while ago [1]. Is the Clerezza RDF library
related to this proposal? In the end the people around
https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf decided not to bring their code
to Apache Commons, because they wanted to use github for development and
discussions. They already requested the commons-rdf git repository from
infra, which is now unused [2]. So if you want to bring your RDF library to
commons, we can use that repo, I guess... I can help you with bootstraping
the component and bring up a website.
Clerezza is unrelated to commons-rdf. Do not be fooled by the many uses
of the word "commons" :-)
There are several RDF systems for the JVM - not all of them here at ASF.
To build community around the controversial area of RDF APIs (they
have always been controversial since day one in RDF land - much history).
Starting from one existing project's API is a non-starter, if nothing
else, from a social perspective. Two major RDF systems go back 13 years.
Having initial discussion on apache-commons lists was felt not to be
ideal to create community across groups not at Apache.
As I recall, it was the details of the commons processes that was felt
to be unhelpful *initially*. Too many other things going on in the same
list for one. To engage as widely as possible, we started on github -
neutral ground.
Benedikt wrote:
> I've created a new component for the project called "RDF" which
> you can use for RDF. When a commons component is promoted to proper we
> create an individual Jira project (this usually happens when we
> release version 1.0).
Now we have a new endeavour here without them. It is very unfair to
call this "commons" or grab "RDF".
Now I see:
rdf/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/rdf/Graph.java
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1646333 | ...
COMMONSSITE-80: renamed some classes to reflect new terms and standards
of RDf 1.1, Took some names and terms from
https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please first reach out to all parties and not just copy one codebase over.
I apologise for not knowing more about the ethos of Apache Commons.
Andy
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/clerezza-dev/201412.mbox/%3C5491AB06.9030601%40apache.org%3E
and thread
[2]
https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
[3]
https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
